Note: When clicking on a Digital Object Identifier (DOI) number, you will be taken to an external site maintained by the publisher.
Some full text articles may not yet be available without a charge during the embargo (administrative interval).
What is a DOI Number?
Some links on this page may take you to non-federal websites. Their policies may differ from this site.
-
Abstract In this work, we tried to replicate and extend prior research on the relationship between social network size and the volume of the amygdala. We focused on the earliest evidence for this relationship (Bickart et al., Nature Neuroscience 14(2), 163–164, 2011) and another methodologically unique study that often is cited as a replication (Kanai et al.,Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 279(1732), 1327–1334, 2012). Despite their tight link in the literature, we argue that Kanai et al. (Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 279(1732), 1327–1334, 2012) is not a replication of Bickart et al. Nature Neuroscience 14(2), 163–164 (2011), because it uses different morphometric measurements. We collected data from 128 participants on a 7-Tesla MRI and examined variations in gray matter volume (GMV) in the amygdala and its nuclei. We found inconclusive support for a correlation between measures of real-world social network and amygdala GMV, with small effect sizes and only anecdotal evidence for a positive relationship. We found support for the absence of a correlation between measures of online social network and amygdala GMV. We discuss different challenges faced in replication attempts for small effects, as initially reported in these two studies, and suggest that the results would be most helpful in the context of estimation and future meta-analytical efforts. Our findings underscore the value of a narrow approach in replication of brain-behavior relationships, one that is focused enough to investigate the specifics of what is measured. This approach can provide a complementary perspective to the more popular “thematic” alternative, in which conclusions are often broader but where conclusions may become disconnected from the evidence.more » « less
-
null (Ed.)People with superior face recognition have relatively thin cortex in face-selective brain areas, whereas those with superior vehicle recognition have relatively thick cortex in the same areas. We suggest that these opposite correlations reflect distinct mechanisms influencing cortical thickness (CT) as abilities are acquired at different points in development. We explore a new prediction regarding the specificity of these effects through the depth of the cortex: that face recognition selectively and negatively correlates with thickness of the deepest laminar subdivision in face-selective areas. With ultrahigh resolution MRI at 7T, we estimated the thickness of three laminar subdivisions, which we term “MR layers,” in the right fusiform face area (FFA) in 14 adult male humans. Face recognition was negatively associated with the thickness of deep MR layers, whereas vehicle recognition was positively related to the thickness of all layers. Regression model comparisons provided overwhelming support for a model specifying that the magnitude of the association between face recognition and CT differs across MR layers (deep vs. superficial/middle) whereas the magnitude of the association between vehicle recognition and CT is invariant across layers. The total CT of right FFA accounted for 69% of the variance in face recognition, and thickness of the deep layer alone accounted for 84% of this variance. Our findings demonstrate the functional validity of MR laminar estimates in FFA. Studying the structural basis of individual differences for multiple abilities in the same cortical area can reveal effects of distinct mechanisms that are not apparent when studying average variation or development.more » « less
An official website of the United States government
